July 5, 2007

The arrest early Wednesday of Gore's son overshadowed Gore's work on the Live Earth concerts. The former Democratic presidential candidate and star of "An Inconvenient Truth" has been planning the worldwide event to raise awareness about the environment and funding for Alliance for Climate Protection, a nonprofit organization he leads.

It's almost as if the son were trying to bring down his father. Drugs in the car and you drive 100 miles per hour? Why?

Didn't one of his daughters also have a drug problem? Anyhow, this is the kind of thing that happens to rich families. The Kennedys get into this kind of stupid trouble all the time (well, rather stupider, actually). So did Bush II when he was young, at least with drinking and driving, and I'm sure Bush II's daughters will too, if they haven't already. Howard Dean's son got caught breaking into a country club too, if I recall correctly.

It's just the kind of thing rich people do. Like stealing policemen's helmets and throwing breadrolls. Or whatever.

I don't think it makes any difference. The only thing that matters is whether Al Gore III. will be treated the same as John Doe Jr. by the authorities. There is no reason to expect that he won't be treated the same

At the very least, it puts an end to Al Gore III's future political career.

This incident doesn't take away from the fact that Al Gore is wrong about his whole global warming crusade and that Al Gore represents one of the most dangerous risks to liberty in America because of his ability to pursuade others to this evil cause.

As for the kid, he probably doesn't want to live life as a president's son - too constraining - and Dad probably was going to make his decision without too much input from the kid.

Maybe. He'd probably have secret service, I guess, together with his three sisters, but it's not like he'd be living in the Whitehouse with him, with Executive office assistants underfoot and so on. He's 24. This isn't Chelsea Clinton in the Clinton (I?) Whitehouse. He might gain incremental notoriety from being the President's son, but it's not like, with a name like Albert Arnold Gore III, people don't already know he's the son of his famous politician father. I don't think his life would be that heavily affected by his father acceding to the Presidency.

"Karenna Gore Schiff was an avid drinker and pot smoker as far back as high school, according to a February 2000 Talk Magazine article by the Washington Post's Hanna Rosin.

"[Friends] say Karenna pushed the boundaries of average teen experimentation, describing her as one of the wildest of their bunch, and dark," the article states. "We smoked a lot of pot," several high-school classmates says of Karenna. On the roof of Al Gore's home, "She and her friends would stay up drinking, smoking and talking. They once ordered fake IDs." On Friday or Saturday nights, "the phrase of choice was boot and rally – as in drink till you boot so you can then rally and drink some more." It went on in her Harvard days, too."

++

"What about Al Gore's daughter Sarah, who was cited by Maryland cops for alcohol possession at the age of 16? Again, without recounting the very dull details, this was a story that was buried in the metro section of the Washington Post and barely surfaced anywhere else. The press was hardly "all over" that. Etc., etc."

Interestingly, you won't find references to these matters on Wikipedia.

"It's almost as if the son were trying to bring down his father. Drugs in the car and you drive 100 miles per hour? Why?"

Frankly, I doubt that thoughts of his father's political career played any role in the young Gore's decision to motor 100MPH in a car in which he had drugs. Judgment, at least in this particular case, doesn't appear to be his strong suit. So, why would one think that his actions reflected any forethought?

"As for the kid, he probably doesn't want to live life as a president's son - too constraining - and Dad probably was going to make his decision without too much input from the kid."

Maybe. But judging by the morally pretentious name of his magazine, Good, I think he's following in his father's footsteps.

It is a private matter, and I wish the family well, but I think it's harder to keep kids safe when they're part of this elite class. Power, money, hangers on, "Hollywood for ugly people." Even Larry Kudlow had a cocaine and alcohol problem at one time!

It's all he knows and does. He's just decided to pursue it in a different way. . .

Without all those dirty plebes having to vote him into power and such.

Didn't the NYT put the "Prius" business in the headline? That's what seems weird to me -- if, in fact, it did, but even so, there's still all the mention of the Prius. Like seeming to say "Well, he's a typical drug-addled person, but at least he was breaking the law in an environmentally responsible manner!"

I would wager that if a conservative's offspring were in a similar situation involving an SUV, that would feature prominently. Just not a plain sedan or coupe.

To the commenters generally: Yes, pile on Al Gore, the Kennedys and all the other rich Dem families. Oddly though, I didn't see one mention of the Bushies, or the current president, as having suffered from the exact same rich-kid problems.

Why can't Gore fall out of love of politics? He's got the best of both worlds now: the pulpit of a pol and the money/flexibility of a private-sector employee. I don't blame him in the least for not wanting to get back in (as evidenced by the attention on his son's issues (I'm surprised no one has alleged Al bought the drugs for his son)).

Seriously, how was the fact that a Prius can do 100mph not THE most noteworthy aspect of that story. I hadn't even test driven one because I figured they couldn't do my kind of speed, but I'm headed to my Toyota dealer this weekend.

Interestingly, you won't find references to these matters on Wikipedia.

The article on Al Gore the III was edited to reflect the arrest. Immediately, and editor by the name of Kaldari deleted any refrence to not only this arrest, but to Gore the younger's past runins with the law and drug problems, and then locked the page so that no one could re-add the information.

Gore:"Some of the[] [candidates] have made good, positive statements [about climate change], but it's still treated as a side issue. I will predict for you that within the next 500 days that this issue will be the Number One issue on the agenda."

If he really believes this, he's not just fallen out of love with politics, he's fallen out of touch with reality.

Steven,At time of reading, the article is locked, but it does discuss this incident:

"On July 4, 2007, Gore was arrested in Laguna Hills in Orange County, California for speeding over 100 MPH in a Toyota Prius. Gore admitted to recently smoking marijuana and was found to be in possession of a small amount of marijuana along with prescription pharmaceuticals. Police reported that Gore had not been prescribed the pharmaceuticals.[7][8]"

I see nothing whatsoever objectionable about the admin locking the page during a period where it will likely be beseiged by partisans motivated by disdain for the subject (or in this case the subject's father). There would only be a problem if the article failed to mention the matter at all.

There would only be a problem if the article failed to mention the matter at all.

Yes, it only mentions it now, after much haranguing. It previously was censored and locked by an admin. If other admins had not been alerted it would have simply remained blank. See the Talk page for the ensuing argument.

The poor kid is trapped and turning to drugs for relief. His fathers posistions and high profile along with his attempt to cash in on the family connection with his magazine dictate that his only choice in a car has to be a Prius. He probably really, really wants a Porche and just couldn't take it any more.

You have to feel a bit sorry for a young guy whose freedom of choice in the car he drives is resticted to one by an accident of birth.

Al Gore III -- whose father is a leading advocate of policies to fight global warming -- was driving his environmentally friendly car at about 100 miles per hour on a freeway south of Los Angeles when he was pulled over by an Orange County sheriff's deputy at about 2:15 a.m.

They threw in The Goracle and Prius angle into the story.

In next week's Autoweek, they should do a comparison test, which car gets better gas mileage at 100mph, Hybrid Toyota Prius, gas powered Honda Fit, or diesel powered Mercedes A-Class (not sold in the USA, but it's time may come). I'd bet under those conditions the A Class would do best by far.

The Mercedes would probably still get around 45-50mph at 100mph, the Fit would get around 35-40mph, and the Prius would drop to around 30-35mph (the faster you go in a Prius, the more the gas engine is used, and it's undersized for the car, so at speed it's very high revving, which means high consumption).

Steve - even if it said nothing at all, I would be sympathetic. I share the disdain for Gore, but I absolutely reject the chosen vehicle - the attempt to commandeer and weaponize the WP article.

Since this is not the position one might expect me to take, let me be candid about why. After Ann's appearence on Bloggingheads opposite Garance Franke-Ruta, numerous representatives of the Anti-Althousiana descended on the Wikipedia article, intent on (to melodramatacize somewhat) converting it into a weapon in their ongoing jihad. Their demand was simple: the article had to reflect "the truth" (i.e. their "truth") which was that Ann is a collosal clot. I argued that this was totally unacceptable - the article should neutrally report or say nothing at all if the former proved impossible. As it turned out, subsequent events demonstrated that the ADS editors would not tolerate a neutral article, and so with some admin intervention, the article now says nothing at all on the subject and is locked, as it ought to remain.

Wikipedia is an encyclopædia, not a soapbox. Gore's entry should neutrally and dispassionately describe this event with as little extraneous material as it warranted; if this proves impractical - and it seems unexceptional to suggest that Gore's detractors are far more numerous and voluminous than Ann's, making the problem all the more compounded - wikipedia administrators should prefer the article to say nothing at all than allow its deliberate weaponization.

Anthony said... In next week's Autoweek, they should do a comparison test, which car gets better gas mileage at 100mph. . .

Heh.

"We loaded each car with one individual and approximately 3 kilos of added weight to represent illegal drugs and other paraphernalia. . . ."

and somebody can add another versus to that old Croce favorite:

Oh rapid roy that stock car boyHe's the best driver in the landHe say that he learned to race a stock carBy runnin' shine outta alabam'Oh the demolition derbyAnd the figure eightIs easy money in the bankCompared to runnin' from the manIn oklahoma cityWith a 500 gallon tank

(Actually, to be yet more candid, I reached the conclusions noted above for the purpose of preventing Ann's the WP article from being comandeered by the ADS mob. It'd be lying if I said I simply neutrally applied preexisting principles to a new problem. Nevertheless, I think those principles are sound, and having used them to defend one article, I'm obligated to follow them now and apply them to other articles.

Rudy's kids have refused to speak to him for several years, because they are still angry with the way he treated their mother.

Also, has anyone ever stopped to think, with all these stories about how Gore's kids, Bush's kids, Dean's son, etc. got into all that trouble, the one kid who absolutely avoided any kind of trouble and has become pretty much everything her parents would have hoped for, is Chelsea Clinton?

Also, has anyone ever stopped to think, with all these stories about how Gore's kids, Bush's kids, Dean's son, etc. got into all that trouble, the one kid who absolutely avoided any kind of trouble and has become pretty much everything her parents would have hoped for, is Chelsea Clinton?

I don't usually go in for class warfare, and my sympathies are typically with the upper-middle-classes and even the upper-classes, not the lower-classes. But there are all kinds of pathological behaviours that are enabled by being filthy rich and well connected -- particularly as a child or a young person -- that would tend to get stamped out in families of more modest means who don't know people who know people in the same way.

Certainly children and young people misbehave no matter what their social background. But it's a lot easier to keep on doing that kind of thing, to keep being a teenager through your twenties, like Al Gore III (or Bush II), if you're from a rich family, and have relatives and family friends there to look out for you.

Also, has anyone ever stopped to think, with all these stories about how Gore's kids, Bush's kids, Dean's son, etc. got into all that trouble, the one kid who absolutely avoided any kind of trouble and has become pretty much everything her parents would have hoped for, is Chelsea Clinton?

Maybe I'm forgetting all the criminality of the Bush twins, but I only recall them being arrested for having a few drinks at some bars and restaurants when they were 19. Which is what virtually every 19 year old in America has done , and which would be legal in my state to this day had the federal government not blackmailed us to raise the drinking age unreasonably high. I'd wonder more about a 19 year old who has never had a drink than one who had a few at a restaurant.

But do tell how Clinton avoided the "pathological behaviours" of rich families. Clinton being an out of control misogynist who sexually assaulted and harassed women and then had them smeared in the media as "trailer trash." I'm pretty sure he's the pathological one, not anyone I've seen from the Bush and Gore families.

As for Gore's son, I can't be to judgmental about possessing marijuana, as I'm in possession at the moment, too. Not sure why he's messing around with that other stuff, though. Must have some problems and I feel sorry for him. And, yeah, when you drive 100MPH with drugs in your car you are begging to get busted. When you do so with such a high-profile father, you might be subconsciously crying out for some attention from dad? I have no idea. Since he's drank and drove in the past and drives at insanely, dangerously high speeds, I hope he's kept off the roads for a long time. (He's done far worse than Paris Hilton, but I won't support him being locked up for 3 1/2 weeks for being a spoiled brat.)

LoafingOaf said..."Maybe I'm forgetting all the criminality of the Bush twins, but I only recall them being arrested for having a few drinks at some bars and restaurants...

and...

...Clinton being an out of control misogynist who sexually assaulted and harassed women and then had them smeared in the media as "trailer trash." I'm pretty sure he's the pathological one, not anyone I've seen from the Bush and Gore families."

yeah...clinton bad...bush good.

of course clinton is also brilliant...and bush is a fucking idiot.

and clinton was president during 8 of america's most productive years, while bush has mangled damn near everything he's touched during 7 of america's very worst years...

Thorley can speak for himself but he didnt use the Globe as a source; he used washingtonsocialite.com or some such gossip site. Having nothing better to do on a thursday after a midweek holiday, I looked at the site and they sure dont make a very convincing case that Chelsea Clinton drinks herself into unconsciousness. Lots of gossipy innuendo, but nothing at all authoritative. Besides, its Chelsea's life anyway--she can do what she wants as a private citizen.

"He wasn't arrested for driving under the influence, I don't think. Only for possession."

The article said that the cop smelled the aroma of marijuana smoke.

So I am guessing the guy was stoned.

Either they are waiting for the blood work to add that charge, or they did not give him blood work because he's Al Gore's son. But I think one would have to be pretty naive to think he was stone cold sober as opposed to stoned cold.

Candidate's families are the source of much mirth, terror, and guilt. They're fair game, I suppose, but I hate commenting on them.

As a Dad myself, I feel for Gore's predicament. Your progeny are part of your reputation, making one realize why Florence King refers to her lifelong "kinderfeindlich sein," translated as meaning "an intense dislike and disregard for children".

But do tell how Clinton avoided the "pathological behaviours" of rich families. Clinton being an out of control misogynist who sexually assaulted and harassed women and then had them smeared in the media as "trailer trash."

Well, which is what he himself was. I'm not saying that people like Clinton don't have pathologies. I'm just saying they're different ones. When he was a young man, unlike Gore or Bush, he actually applied himself in school, got a Rhodes scholarship, went to a good law school, etc. That many years later, once he attained high office, he turned out to be sexually incontinent is a different matter. After all, whatever we might say about Gore or Bush as young men (both mediocre students, etc.), both of them have ended up as sober, respectable men. Gore may wax messianic about global warming, and Bush about democracy and human freedom, but in their personal lives I don't think I've ever heard anything really credible against them. They're stolidly respectable. That's why Gore kissing his wife full on in public was so shocking to people, after all.

Re:Luckyoldson:

and clinton was president during 8 of america's most productive years, while bush has mangled damn near everything he's touched during 7 of america's very worst years...

Er . . . what numbers are you looking at? The end of Clinton's term and the start of Bush II's term featured a brief recession, a little like the brief recession that closed out Bush I's term, but since then, we've had steady growth. A slight lag in employment, but that's come up again, the same as it did a few years into Clinton's term. The trade deficit has worsened, of course, but it's been getting steadily worse since Bush I, which was the last time we had an even balance, or anything like it, if I recall correctly.

Lucky: I don't think Bush is a good president and I didn't think Clinton was a good one either (he left office with the country going into recession, the bubble bursting on the stock market, and terror cells running around America readying their attacks, for examples). I credit the American people with keeping this country from completely going to hell while having such lousy presidents the last 15 or so years. But none of that is relevant to anything I said in my post.

I'm not gonna read how "pathological" the Bush and Gore families are in contrast to Clinton as if people are living in a fantasy world and the out of control behaviors of Clinton didn't dominate our news for the better for of a decade, capped off with Clinton selling a pardon to Marc Rich because he was pathologically obsessed with funding his Clinton Library. People can think what they like about the politics and policies of Bush and Gore, but they are both well-adjusted, decent human beings as far as I can tell. Clinton is a crap human being.

Libby represented Marc Rich at the time the pardon was considered and granted. Libby even defended Rich before Congress while Libby was serving as Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff.

ironic, huh?

p.s. Balfegor: ONLY the far right wing complains about the clinton years. and you can spout all of your silly coming "recession" crap all you want, but we were at peace, revered by damn the entire world, the economy grew, 22 million jobs were created, unemployment was almost non-existent, abortions dropped, drug use dropped, and when he left office we had a massive surplus. (and even after the impeachment fiasco he had an approval rating 30% better than the idiot in the white house right now.)

oh, and as for clinton...yes, america was most certainly revered worldwide...and as for clinton himself...he was and still is revered by the entire world. (what do you think the rest of the world thinks of bush?)

From UpToDate:"Testing for drugs of abuse can be performed on multiple types of samples, including urine, blood, breath, hair, saliva, and sweat. Urine testing is most widely used. Marijuana metabolites are stored in adipose and can be excreted in the urine for several days. Therefore, a positive urine test does not necessarily prove current impairment. Nonetheless, a positive test does indicate recent marijuana ingestion and should lead to a determination of patterns of use, and potential for dependence."

Her first novel? **** stars on Amazon. 90 reviews. From people with names like "M. Hammer. Florida."

Here's what The Washington Post says about her new novel: "The new book is readable, sometimes funny and certainly interesting, but ultimately it has the problem of being two different novels that don't fit together."

As you get on your knees to worship Clinton's brilliant handling of the economy, consider that almost all of your praise could be applied to the economy of the roaring 20's... and look how well that worked out.

What has the Bush administration done? Prevent another great depression by cutting the top tax rate to stimulate the economy with REAL wealth, as opposed to the wacky Dotcom Dollars we were using in the 90's.

Oh, and we were at peace? HA! You lefties and your memory hole. Have you forgotten when Clinton decided to murder a few thousand Serbs via cruise missles, despite the fact that they were absolutely no threat to us? Hell, we didn't even get permission from the UN - an illegal war!

And I remember reading constant articles on early indymedia that Clinton's embargo on Iraq was responsible for the slow deaths of a million innocent civilians. Oh well, I suppose your hyperbole now is more accurate than your hyperbole then.

p.s. Balfegor: ONLY the far right wing complains about the clinton years.

Uh . . . how about no. Remember NAFTA? Remember Welfare Reform? It wasn't the right wing that was screaming bloody murder about how the end of the world was nigh. It was the left wing. People like Barbara Ehrenreich, with Nickel and Dimed. Similarly, when the Echelon domestic espionage scare (allegedly, the UK was spying on US citizens and passing the data to us), the outrage wasn't notably right-wing. And when Clinton invaded the Balkans without UN consent, again, it wasn't the right wing (except for some isolationist paleocons) who objected.

and you can spout all of your silly coming "recession" crap all you want,

But . . . um . . . there was a recession. I was slightly inaccurate above, in that the NBER has determined that the recession actually started at the end of the first quarter of 2001, after Bush had taken office, rather than in the last months of Clinton's term. On the other hand, if you look at the BEA's numbers, you see we experienced contraction first in Q3 2000 (-0.5%), then again in Q1 (-0.5%) and Q3 2001 (-1.4%, although part of that quarter's figure is due to 9-11). The numbers going into those GDP figures led some commentators at the time to characterise the recession has having begun with the first contraction. Either way, though, there was a coming recession, whether it broke on Clinton's watch or Bush's. It was an extremely mild one, yes, even milder than the recession that closed out Bush I's term. But if people are going to complain that it's Bush's fault somehow, when he'd only been in office for a month when the recession began, and the slowdown had been underway since late 2000, when he was still campaigning for the presidency . . . well, let's just be clear what the numbers say here.

but we were at peace,

Except for our invasions of Somalia and the Balkans, our missile attacks on the Sudan and Iraq, and our ongoing drug wars down in Colombia and other locations in Latin America. Other than that, sure, we were at peace. The same way we're at peace today, other than our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, our continuing operations down in Colombia, and activists urging us to invade the Sudan or something. It seems to be freaking out the Sudanese government at least.

revered by damn the entire world,

Uhhh . . . I don't remember this. Although I will grant that America's approval rating in the world opinion markets has fallen under Bush (obviously). Let's not pretend it was falling from a super-high place though.

the economy grew,

Same under Bush.

22 million jobs were created,

Okay, there Clinton's figures are clearly better. But Bush has had pretty good numbers here.

unemployment was almost non-existent,

The unemployment rate today is 4.5%, low by historical standards, although several tenths of a percentage point off Clinton's all-time low. If you look at the graph here, from the BLS, you can see that the general trend during Bush's years in office has pretty much replicated the general trend during Clinton's years in office, we just saw a sharp spike in unemployment during 2001, which persisted for a few years. More generally, if you look at the longer annual time series here, also from BLS, you can see that the average during Clinton's term (1993-2000) was 5.2%, and that the average during Bush's term (2001-2006) is 5.3%. With 2007 and 2008 added in, unless current trends are disrupted, Bush should match or better Clinton's unemployment figures.

abortions dropped, drug use dropped,

No idea what the current numbers here look like. On drug use, I also don't know how we would measure that reliably, since it's mostly illegal.

and when he left office we had a massive surplus.

True.

Anyhow, my point is that things have been pretty good under Bush, actually. I really don't understand what people are complaining about. Maybe they all got themselves into those wacky mortgages in the foolish expectation that they could flip houses or condos for fun and profit, and now they're being forced to eat huge losses. Or something.

Jenna went and taught public school for a year and a bit, and is supposed to be doing social work in a shelter or something now. Barabara went and worked with AIDS sufferers in Africa for a while, but is in New York doing something or other now. Of course, both of them get soused and so on on a regular basis, and wikipedia tells me they were asked to leave Argentina for running naked in the halls. But the work they've done so far is pretty standard upper-class noblesse-oblige type stuff.

1.if nafta is the best you can come up with, you're screwed. there are studies that support the god and the bad, with little if any consensus.

2.Washington Post - Date: July 18, 2003Author: John M. Berry

"The U.S. economic recession that began in March 2001 ended eight months later in November. '

3.you're seriously going to compare Somalia and the Balkans, and continmissile attacks on the Sudan and Iraq...with the iraqi invasion, aftermath and the continuing civil war? (GFL)

*Got some dead and wounded numbers you want to compare, too??

4.bill clinton got the first standing ovation in over 30 years at the un. 90% of the world loved and revered america. and now, most of the world reviles us and our actions in iraq.

5.with the exception of the stock market, the "economy" grew at a much bigger pace under clinton. more good jobs, less outsourcing, a surplus and no war expenditures.

6.when Bill Clinton was elected President, the American economy was barely creating jobs, wages were stagnant, and the unemployment rate was 7.5 percent. the Unemployment Rate was 4.2 Percent in 1999 -- the Lowest Since 1969.

7.and when he left office we had a massive surplus.

*and you have the balls to close with this:

"Anyhow, my point is that things have been pretty good under Bush, actually. I really don't understand what people are complaining about."

1.if nafta is the best you can come up with, you're screwed. there are studies that support the god and the bad, with little if any consensus.

Let's review the statements here --

You say:

ONLY the far right wing complains about the clinton years.

And I point out that this just isn't so. I point to specific policies pursued by Clinton that the left wing objected strenuously to, and even cite to an entire book -- a popular, widely read left-wing critique of Clinton's economic policies, one even you must be familiar with -- just to demonstrate that, duh, it's not "ONLY" the right wing that objected to the Clinton years.

You say: "there are studies that support the good the bad with little if any consensus"

Uh, okay. Yeah, that sounds right. But that's like a total non sequitur here. Not what we're talking about. We're talking about the right wing being the only ones who criticised the 90s. And that's simply not true. Is the adamantine shield of your wilful obtusity so powerful that clear counterexamples make no impression whatsoever?

I mean, hey, I think NAFTA was wonderful. As did/do a lot of right-wingers. Welfare reform? Woohoo! I'm not objecting to Clinton's economic management. I think his economic management was good, in that he didn't try to do much of it. He was generally hands-off, and the major pieces of economic legislation that we had under Clinton, like the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, did things like help big business by making it harder for individuals and plaintiff classes to sue them for securities fraud. Bush, in contrast, signed off on things like Sarbanes-Oxley, which had . . . the opposite effect, and (if you believe Prof. Bainbridge and others) has been adversely affecting American business, compared against European and Asian business, ever since it was signed. So I'm not arguing that Bush's management has been superior.

I'm just pointing out that you're delusional if you think the critiques of the 90s were coming from the Right, as you said. The most forceful critiques on the economic front came from the Left wing. I think they were wrong. But that's because I'm, uh, right wing. And so were Clinton's economic policies. Even on social issues, a lot of the criticism came from the Left again. Take the Defense of Marriage Act. How many right-wingers do you think came out criticising DOMA?

Re: WaPo:

"The U.S. economic recession that began in March 2001 ended eight months later in November. '

Uh, yes. I.e. it started a whole month after Bush took office. Yeah, that was his economy there, pushing his legislation the minute he took that oath.

Not.

Anyhow, if you'd bothered to take a look at the links I provided, you'd find that shockingly enough, the NBER, which is somewhat more authoritative than a journalist, actually provided that exact conclusion. And I pointed out that even so, we started experiencing economic contraction in Clinton's last year.

3.you're seriously going to compare Somalia and the Balkans, and continmissile attacks on the Sudan and Iraq...with the iraqi invasion, aftermath and the continuing civil war? (GFL)

Look, you're moving the goalposts. You came out with the delusional statement that we spent the 90s at peace. Uh, no we did not. As anyone not living in a fantasy world could tell you.

bal says: "Look, you're moving the goalposts. You came out with the delusional statement that we spent the 90s at peace. Uh, no we did not. As anyone not living in a fantasy world could tell you."

for you to continue trying to compare the state of america and the world in general...during the 90's with what we have now...and if you think things were anywhere near as bad as they are now...tells me you're out of your fucking mind.

as for the rest of the right wing sycophants here...i'm glad there are still idiots out there who support george w. bush. the resulting "blowback" from past failures, lies, ineptitude, combined with future failures, ineptitude, corruption and lies will assure the democrats the presidency in 2008.

hang in there...we only have about a year and half left of these assholes.

I never cease to be amazed at how adept partisans are at getting people, including me, off on tangents.

Lucky just did so again; I should not have let him.

Gore's kid was driving 100 mph in a car that smelled of marijuana smoke.

Dude was stoned.

Only because he's a politician's son does this obvious conclusion get called into question. You or me try something so foolish, we get hit with driving under the influence as well if we refuse to be tested. Him? He gets to not be tested.

Regardless of the way it was handled, it is clear the dude was stoned.

Which really torques me off. I favor legalization, and every time some stupid putz gets behind the wheel and drives recklessly with weed either in his system or his car or both it makes it much less likely that we will ever remove the prohibition that I believe we should remove.

And all the while you get partisans on both sides playing the same old "he's on my side so he's innocent and a victim of your side trying to get him"/ "he's on your side so he discredits everything about your side" bullshit as always. Boring as hell, folks.

Gore's kid is a screwup. Good people have screwup kids, too. Bad people have good kids. Maybe there is some correlation, but you can't draw conclusions from just one data point. IIRC, Jeb Bush has a drug abusing kid as well.

"for you to continue trying to compare the state of america and the world in general...during the 90's with what we have now...and if you think things were anywhere near as bad as they are now...tells me you're out of your fucking mind."

Considering the fact that the first attempt to bring down the Twin Towers was made in the 90s, and considering that the 9/11 plot was conceptually developed and trained for mostly in the 90s, I think the idea that the 90s were this tranquil time is delusional. And that is without getting into the same old crap that was going on in Palestine, in Somalia, and in Kosovo.

ATHENS, Greece (CNN) -- Riot police fired tear gas, and anti-American protesters responded with gasoline bombs Friday as central Athens became a battleground just as U.S. President Bill Clinton arrived in the Greek capital for a short visit.

Clinton originally planned a longer stay in Greece, to begin before a European security summit in Istanbul, Turkey. But Greek and U.S. security concerns pushed him to postpone the trip until after the summit and shorten it to less than 24 hours.

The leftist protesters are angry at the U.S. role in NATO's bombing attack on Yugoslavia earlier this year.

The riot erupted in Syndagma Square almost at the very moment Air Force One touched down at Athens international airport. More than 10,000 protesters, who had come to the square for a Communist-led rally, tried to defy a ban on marching to the U.S. Embassy, but were blocked by a wall of helmeted, black-clad riot police. ALSO

* Summit outlines Europe's role in conflicts

MESSAGE BOARDClinton in Europe

Walking slowly en masse down the street toward the embassy, the protesters came literally face-to-face with the police -- and the tear gas.

A group of anarchists, who had gathered at a nearby rally, joined the main demonstration and responded to the police use of tear gas by hurling firebombs, rocks and marine flares, smashing storefront windows and burning American flags.

A series of running battles between police and rioters followed through the city's shopping and business district. At least five banks were damaged, one severely.'Friend

*Study from 2,500 scientists concludes global warming is real and humans are the main cause.

*Nearly five months into a security strategy that involves thousands of additional U.S. and Iraqi troops patrolling Baghdad, the number of unidentified bodies found on the streets of the capital was 41 percent higher in June than in January.

You know, with the way we voters keep throwing one party out of office and then the other, we would think that the partisans would develop some humility, knowing their time at the top is only transient.

for you to continue trying to compare the state of america and the world in general...during the 90's with what we have now...and if you think things were anywhere near as bad as they are now...tells me you're out of your fucking mind.

We were waging war in at least one nation during every year of the 1990s -- Iraq (which we attacked, and were attacked by, from 1991 through 2003), Bosnia, Somalia, etc. Plus, of course, widespread genocide was taking place in various nations (e.g. Rwanda), al Qaeda carried out numerous attacks against America and Americans abroad, the Taliban took over Afghanistan, Pakistan and India got nukes...

Heck, more people died from warfare, genocide, and terrorism during the average year of the 1990s than died last year. Some "peace"!

Good show, chap. All of your posts really should include this label. I mean, those of us who have been around here a while assume that when we see your screen name, but it would be quite handy for those who are relatively new.

Sloanasaurus said... "This incident doesn't take away from the fact that Al Gore is wrong about his whole global warming crusade and that Al Gore represents one of the most dangerous risks to liberty in America because of his ability to pursuade others to this evil cause."

I swear to God you numbnuts, you are the original turd in the swimmingpool. Gore, risk to liberty, evil cause....global warming crusade...

Don't let science rise up and bite you on the ass...you might leak out and infect the world.

Until Sandy Berger, who stole and destroyed classified US security documents, gets a just punishment, I'm disinclined to listen to any liberal carping about Libby's pardon.

Anyway, as to the question at hand, I don't think this is particularly relevant to Gore himself. The fact that a kid turned out badly (and speeding + possessing drugs is hardly a 'bad kid') does not mean the father was a bad or neglectful parent.

This is an important post and indicative of the seriousness of the Conservative viewpoint. Let us all thank the prominent lawyer running this blog for her continued excellent and insightful commentary -- commentary which illuminates conservative issues, concerns, and social outlook. To hell with Dick the Butcher.